Lini Pandite: At the moment, Marc, it’s too early to kind of draw those conclusions. The first patient had received PARP. The first patient with the PR had received PARP inhibitors. The second patient – the second – the next two patients have received Bev, so it’s hard to draw any conclusions at this.
Marc Frahm: Okay, makes sense. And then thinking forward to next year, when we’ll see the initial MIRV combo data. There’s a couple of different populations based on MIRV expression level, sorry, fully expression levels. Just can you kind of frame how big of a data set you’re expecting to be able to provide and the robustness you’ll be able to look across those different expression levels?
Lini Pandite: Yes. We are expecting it to enroll up to 70 patients. That 70 patients will include high, medium and low. And we are working with ImmunoGen to benchmark what would be an interesting response rate and durability of response in each of those subgroups.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Kaveri Pohlman of BTIG. Your line is open.
Unidentified Analyst: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. I’m Christian. I’m on for Kaveri. So you actually answered part of my question and it was just about ELAHERE combo trial wanted to know what would you guys consider a meaningful ORR? Like are you guys has being close to determining that, considering that this is enrolling folate receptor alpha, medium and low expressers. But beyond that, I noticed that ELAHERE’s registrational trial required 100% of the patients to receive prior bevacizumab. So going forward, are there plans to also make this a requirement in that trial?
Taylor Schreiber: Great. Good morning, Christian thanks for the question. Lini, why don’t you go ahead and take that question as well.
Lini Pandite: Thank you for the question. So the trial was designed with the exact eligibility criteria as SORAYA. So all patients were required to have received bevacizumab, and that’s how the trial was written.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. Thank you. And my next question is just about the PLD combo trial, are you guys planning to use biomarker analysis to determine differences in responders and nonresponders? If so, are you planning to use this to take eligible patients in the future?
Taylor Schreiber: Yes. Thanks, Christian. We are continuing to collect a variety of different biomarker data from these patients, some of which is similar to the data that was shared in our ASCO abstract earlier this year with regard to peripheral cytokine responses, margination of CD40 expressing cells, changes in the immunophenotype of both peripheral cells as well as through evaluation of pre- and on-treatment biopsies from these patients. And we hope certainly that, that data may inform a patient selection strategy or a responder, nonresponder analysis at a subsequent date. But we’ll report on that as the size of the data set increases toward the end of the study.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. Thank you. That’s helpful. Thanks for taking my questions.
Taylor Schreiber: No problem.
Operator: Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from the line of Yigal Nochomovitz of Citi. Your line is open.
Yigal Nochomovitz: Yes. Hi thanks for taking the question. On PROC, I was just wondering if you plan to look at or if you already have looked at any correlation between the platinum-free interval for these patients and the degree of response? And then on heme, with respect to the frontline studies in TP53 and higher-risk MDS, do you have any reason to believe or biologic hypothesis that the SL-172154 either combo would be potentially more effective in one of these cohorts versus the other? Thank you.
